Conservative arguments against Sotomayor
-
The opposition to Sotomayor is simply revealing the prejudices of those doing the opposing. Exhibit A. There has been a series of articles (Krauthammer, Gerson and many others) denouncing the idea that "empathy" should play any role in judicial decisions. Yet here is right-wing hero Samuel Alito testifying before the Senate:
Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result. But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country." When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me. And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/27/sotomayor/index.html[^] David Brooks correctly names those who make judgements without empathy: sociopaths. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html[^] Exhibit B: Accusations have been flying around that Sotomayor is a racist since she argues that being from a particular backgr
-
The opposition to Sotomayor is simply revealing the prejudices of those doing the opposing. Exhibit A. There has been a series of articles (Krauthammer, Gerson and many others) denouncing the idea that "empathy" should play any role in judicial decisions. Yet here is right-wing hero Samuel Alito testifying before the Senate:
Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result. But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country." When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me. And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/27/sotomayor/index.html[^] David Brooks correctly names those who make judgements without empathy: sociopaths. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html[^] Exhibit B: Accusations have been flying around that Sotomayor is a racist since she argues that being from a particular backgr
You don't need to be a genius to realize that she is a psycho bitch mad with the feeling of power. Don.t say she has not power, regardless, she sure feels it. What difference does it make what you think about American politics? You live in Australia, your opinions are useless. You simply regurgitate the common belief that opposition to the new administration and its appointees is considered racist. That alone makes your opinions as useless as fictional propaganda.
-
You don't need to be a genius to realize that she is a psycho bitch mad with the feeling of power. Don.t say she has not power, regardless, she sure feels it. What difference does it make what you think about American politics? You live in Australia, your opinions are useless. You simply regurgitate the common belief that opposition to the new administration and its appointees is considered racist. That alone makes your opinions as useless as fictional propaganda.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
What difference does it make what you think about American politics?
None at all. On the other hand, some of my arguments may be of interest to those whose opinions do make some difference.
John Carson
-
The opposition to Sotomayor is simply revealing the prejudices of those doing the opposing. Exhibit A. There has been a series of articles (Krauthammer, Gerson and many others) denouncing the idea that "empathy" should play any role in judicial decisions. Yet here is right-wing hero Samuel Alito testifying before the Senate:
Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result. But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country." When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me. And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/27/sotomayor/index.html[^] David Brooks correctly names those who make judgements without empathy: sociopaths. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html[^] Exhibit B: Accusations have been flying around that Sotomayor is a racist since she argues that being from a particular backgr
-
John Carson wrote:
The opposition to Sotomayor is simply revealing the prejudices of those doing the opposing.
Lying "liberal" hypocrite. But, I repeat myself.
-
The opposition to Sotomayor is simply revealing the prejudices of those doing the opposing. Exhibit A. There has been a series of articles (Krauthammer, Gerson and many others) denouncing the idea that "empathy" should play any role in judicial decisions. Yet here is right-wing hero Samuel Alito testifying before the Senate:
Because when a case comes before me involving, let's say, someone who is an immigrant -- and we get an awful lot of immigration cases and naturalization cases -- I can't help but think of my own ancestors, because it wasn't that long ago when they were in that position. And so it's my job to apply the law. It's not my job to change the law or to bend the law to achieve any result. But when I look at those cases, I have to say to myself, and I do say to myself, "You know, this could be your grandfather, this could be your grandmother. They were not citizens at one time, and they were people who came to this country." When I have cases involving children, I can't help but think of my own children and think about my children being treated in the way that children may be treated in the case that's before me. And that goes down the line. When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account. When I have a case involving someone who's been subjected to discrimination because of disability, I have to think of people who I've known and admire very greatly who've had disabilities, and I've watched them struggle to overcome the barriers that society puts up often just because it doesn't think of what it's doing -- the barriers that it puts up to them.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/05/27/sotomayor/index.html[^] David Brooks correctly names those who make judgements without empathy: sociopaths. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/opinion/29brooks.html[^] Exhibit B: Accusations have been flying around that Sotomayor is a racist since she argues that being from a particular backgr
Hmmmm, perhaps that was why Obama supported an attempt to filibuster Alito...
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.